| Exxon Valdez Oil Spill |
Article Index for Exxon |
Shopping Valdez |
Website Links For Exxon Valdez |
Information AboutExxon Valdez Oil Spill |
|
.]] THE ACCIDENT The , 1989 . The accident resulted in the discharge of approximately 11 million gallons of oil (240,000 barrels), 20% of the cargo, into Prince William Sound . 1 The cause of incident was investigated by the National Transportation Safety Board who identified five following factors as contributing to the grounding of the vessel:
The Board made a number of recommendations, such as changes to the work patterns of Exxon crew in order to address the causes of the accident. AMOUNT SPILLED According to official reports, the ship carried 53,094,510 gallons of oil, of which 10.8 million gallons were spilled.ThinkQuest: "ExxonValdez FAQ." Retrieved May 31, 2007. This figure has become the consensus estimate of the spill's volume, as it has been accepted by the State of Alaska's Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council, 2 the , Sierra Club : "16 Years of Exxon Valdez tragedy...America's coastline still at risk." Retrieved May 31, 2007. among others. Some groups, such as Defenders Of Wildlife , dispute the official estimates, maintaining that the volume of the spill has been underreported Defenders Of Wildlife : "Defenders of Wildlife Fact Sheet." Retrieved May 31, 2007. because oil reclaimed from the damaged tanker would have been emulsified in seawater, throwing off calculations. CLEANUP MEASURES A trial burn was conducted during the early stages of the spill, in a region of the spill isolated from the rest by a fire-resistant boom. The test was relatively successful, but because of unfavourable weather no additional burning was attempted in this cleanup effort. Mechanical cleanup was started shortly afterwards using booms and skimmers, but the skimmers were not readily available during the first 24 hours following the spill, and thick oil and Kelp tended to clog the equipment. A private company applied dispersant on March 24 with a helicopter and dispersant bucket. Because there was not enough wave action to mix the dispersant with the oil in the water, their use was discontinued. It now turns out that dispersants may be worse than the oil itself. Concentrations of 10 parts per million of the detergents are acutely toxic to many marine mammals and plants, and large numbers of shellfish such as limpets and barnacles on inter-tidal rocks in the spray area were killed. Exxon was widely criticized for its slow response to cleaning up the disaster and John Devens, the Mayor of Valdez, has said his community felt betrayed by Exxon's inadequate response to the crisis.Mallenbaker article on Exxon's mismanagement of the crisis {Link without Title} Retrieved Aug 17/07 Nevertheless, working with the U.S. Coast Guard, which officially led the response, Exxon mounted a cleanup effort that exceeded in cost, scope and thoroughness any previous oil spill cleanup. More than 11,000 Alaska residents, along with many Exxon employees, worked throughout the region to help restore the environment. Because Prince William Sound contained many rocky coves where the oil collected, the decision was taken to blast it off the rocks with high- pressure hot water. But this blasted the micro-organisms living on the rocks, which were the basis of the marine food chain, leaving the areas sterile. Some American experts - not paid by the oil companies - now think the oil should have been left where it was to degrade gradually. At the time, both scientific advice and public pressure was to clean everything. Exxon later released "Scientists and the Alaska Oil Spill," a video carrying the label "A Video for Students" that was given to schools and is reported of being highly distorting in how it shows the clean-up process.TextbookLeague.org: "Exxon peddles corporate propaganda to science teachers." Retrieved May 31, 2007. According to several studies funded by the state of Alaska, the spill had a range of short and long term economic impacts. These included the loss of recreational sports fisheries, reduced tourism, and an estimate of what economists call " Existence Value ," which is the value to the public of a pristine Prince William Sound. However, after 18 years many animals are still recovering from this disaster. LITIGATION In 1994 , in the case of ''Baker vs. Exxon'', an Anchorage jury awarded $287 million for actual damages and $5 billion for Punitive Damages . The punitive damages amount was based on a single year's Profit by Exxon at that time. Exxon appealed the ruling and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court Of Appeals ordered the original judge, Russel Holland, to reduce the punitive damages. On December 6 , 2002 , the judge announced that he had reduced the damages to $4 billion, which he concluded was justified by the facts of the case and was not grossly excessive. Exxon appealed again, sending the case back to court to be considered in regard to a recent Supreme Court ruling in a similar case, which caused Judge Holland to increase the punitive damages to $4.5 billion, plus Interest . After more appeals, and oral arguments heard by the 9th Circuit Appellate Court on January 27, 2006, the damages award was cut to $2.5 billion on December 22, 2006.Keller-Rohrback: "Exxon case overview." Retrieved May 31, 2007. The court cited recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings relative to limits on punitive damages. Exxon appealed again. On May 23, 2007, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied Exxon Mobil Corp.'s request for another hearing, letting stand its ruling that Exxon owes $2.5 billion in punitive damages. Exxon's only further option for appeal is the U.S. Supreme Court. Exxon has said it will make this final appeal. Exxon's official position is that punitive damages greater than $25 million are not justified because the spill resulted from an accident, and because Exxon spent an estimated $2 billion cleaning up the spill, along with a further $1 billion to settle civil and criminal charges related to the case. Attorneys for the plaintiffs contended that Exxon bore responsibility for the accident because the company "put a drunk in charge of a tanker in Prince William Sound."'' San Francisco Chronicle '': "Punitive damages appealed in Valdez spill." Retrieved May 31, 2007. Exxon recovered a significant portion of clean-up and legal expenses through insurance claimsD.G. King Reinsurance Company: "Summary of the Court of Appeal Judgment." Retrieved May 31, 2007. and tax deductions for the loss of the Valdez.SEC: "Form 10-K." Retrieved May 31, 2007. Also, in 1991, Exxon made a separate financial settlement with a group of seafood producers known as the Seattle Seven for the disaster's impact on the Alaskan seafood industry. The agreement granted $63.75 million to the Seattle Seven but stipulated that the seafood companies would have to repay almost all of any punitive damages to Exxon.'' Puget Sound Business Journal '': The Seattle Seven made out very well back in 1991. Other fish buyers, such as Cook Inlet Seafood Services, buying fish for Seafoods From Alaska and other processors were put into a mandatory class action and offered six cents on the dollar of what their claim was and have been waiting since 1989 for any kind of closure. Cook Inlet Seafood Services lost in excess of $977,000 due to the oil spill. Seafoods From Alaska went out of business shortly after the spill. Cook Inlet Seafood Service's councel,FAEGRE AND BENSON,in a letter dated Jan. 31, 1995 wrote "Judge Holland's rulings are a huge victory for the plaintiffs" Larry Powers of Cook Inlet Seafood Services, in 2005 was offered six cents on the dollar of what his claim was. He was told that his class only has that much to ditrubute. He doesn't think ninety four percent is a victoty. "Exxon Valdez case still twisting through courts." Retrieved May 31, 2007. SHIP In the aftermath of the Exxon Valdez incident, the U.S. Congress passed the Oil Pollution Act Of 1990 , including a clause prohibiting vessels that had caused oil spills of more than one million U.S. gallons (3,800 m³). In April 1998, the company argued in a legal action against the U.S. government that the ship should be allowed back to Valdez, since the regulation was unfairly directed at Exxon alone (no other ships meet this criterion). The Oil Pollution Act also set a schedule for the gradual phase in of a double-hull design, providing an additional layer between the oil tanks and the ocean. While a double hull would likely not have prevented the Valdez disaster, a Coast Guard study estimated that it would have cut the amount of oil spilled by 60 percent.'' Anchorage Daily News '': "Double-hull tankers face slow going." Retireved May 31, 2007. The Exxon Valdez supertanker was towed to San Diego , arriving on July 10 and repairs began in July 30 , 1989. Approximately 1,600 tons of steel were removed and replaced. In June 1990 the tanker, renamed ''SeaRiver Mediterranean'', left harbor after $30 million of repairs. She has since been renamed ''Mediterranean'', and is still sailing as of August 2007. The vessel is current owned by SeaRiver Maritime, a privately held subsidiary wholly owned by ExxonMobil ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ExxonMobil suggests quite the contrary in a 2003 press release, "...science has learned in Alaska and elsewhere is that while oil spills can have acute short-term effects, the environment has remarkable powers of recovery." OTHER IMPACTS The Oil, Chemical, and Atomic Workers Union, representing approximately 40,000 workers nationwide, announced opposition to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) until Congress enacted a comprehensive national energy policy. In the aftermath of the spill, Alaska governor Steve Cowper issued an executive order requiring two Tugboats to escort every loaded tanker from Valdez out through Prince William Sound to Hinchinbrook Entrance. As the plan evolved in the 1990s, one of the two routine tugboats was replaced with a 210 foot (64 m) Escort Response Vehicle (ERV). The majority of tankers at Valdez are still single-hulled, but Congress has enacted legislation requiring all tankers to be double-hulled by 2015. In 1991, following the collapse of the local Marine population (particularly Clam s, Herring , and Seal s) the Chugach Native American group went Bankrupt Doug Loshbaugh School of Hard Knocks Many of the Real Estate Appraisal methods used to value contaminated property and Brownfields were developed as a result of and following the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. The use of survey research (e.g. -- Contingent Valuation and conjoint measurement) became a well accepted appraisal method as a result of the complex valuation problems associated with contamination Greenfield Advisors David McLean and Bill Mundy , The Addition of Contingent Valuation and Conjoint Measurement to the Body of Knowledge for Real Estate Appraisal, ''Journal of Real Estate Practice and Education'', 1999 EXTERNAL LINKS
REFERENCES |
|
|